Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29617843›Full record

ArticleNeuro-oncology2018

In vivo evaluation of EGFRvIII mutation in primary glioblastoma patients via complex multiparametric MRI signature.

Hamed Akbari, Spyridon Bakas, Jared M Pisapia, MacLean P Nasrallah, Martin Rozycki, Maria Martinez-Lage, Jennifer J D Morrissette, Nadia Dahmane, Donald M O'Rourke, Christos Davatzikos

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Neuro-oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 113 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Artificial Intelligence-Driven Multi-Omics Approaches in Glioblastoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Phenomic Imaging.Phenomics (Cham, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  20. Review

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hamed AkbariCenter for Biomedical Image Computing and Analytics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadephia, Pennsylvania.
Spyridon BakasCenter for Biomedical Image Computing and Analytics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadephia, Pennsylvania.
Jared M PisapiaCenter for Biomedical Image Computing and Analytics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadephia, Pennsylvania.
MacLean P NasrallahDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadephia, Pennsylvania.
Martin RozyckiCenter for Biomedical Image Computing and Analytics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadephia, Pennsylvania.
Maria Martinez-LageDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadephia, Pennsylvania.
Jennifer J D MorrissetteDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadephia, Pennsylvania.
Nadia DahmaneDepartment of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadephia, Pennsylvania.
Donald M O'RourkeDepartment of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadephia, Pennsylvania.
Christos DavatzikosCenter for Biomedical Image Computing and Analytics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadephia, Pennsylvania.
University of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

Phenotypic Diversity in COVID-19UL1TR001878 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI FITZGERALD, GARRET A · 2016 to 2025
$102.4M
Statistical atlases of brain tumor MRI:do imaging phenotypes predict progression?R01NS042645 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI DAVATZIKOS, CHRISTOS · 2002 to 2024
$8.7M
Cancer imaging phenomics software suite: application to brain and breast cancerU24CA189523 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI DAVATZIKOS, CHRISTOS, KONTOS, DESPINA · 2015 to 2019
$3.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001878NCI NIH HHS U24 CA189523NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS042645
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Epidermal growth factor receptor variant III (EGFRvIII) is a driver mutation and potential therapeutic target in glioblastoma. Non-invasive in vivo EGFRvIII determination, using clinically acquired multiparametric MRI sequences, could assist in assessing spatial heterogeneity related to EGFRvIII, currently not captured via single-specimen analyses. We hypothesize that integration of subtle, yet distinctive, quantitative imaging/radiomic patterns using machine learning may lead to non-invasively determining molecular characteristics, and particularly the EGFRvIII mutation. Methods: We integrated diverse imaging features, including the tumor's spatial distribution pattern, via support vector machines, to construct an imaging signature of EGFRvIII. This signature was evaluated in independent discovery (n = 75) and replication (n = 54) cohorts of de novo glioblastoma, and compared with the EGFRvIII status obtained through an assay based on next-generation sequencing. Results: The cross-validated accuracy of the EGFRvIII signature in classifying the mutation status in individual patients of the independent discovery and replication cohorts was 85.3% (specificity = 86.3%, sensitivity = 83.3%, area under the curve [AUC] = 0.85) and 87% (specificity = 90%, sensitivity = 78.6%, AUC = 0.86), respectively. The signature was consistent with EGFRvIII+ tumors having increased neovascularization and cell density, as well as a distinctive spatial pattern involving relatively more frontal and parietal regions compared with EGFRvIII- tumors. Conclusions: An imaging signature of EGFRvIII was found, revealing a complex, yet distinct macroscopic glioblastoma phenotype. By non-invasively capturing the tumor in its entirety, the proposed methodology can assist in evaluating the tumor's spatial heterogeneity, hence overcoming common spatial sampling limitations of tissue-based analyses. This signature can preoperatively stratify patients for EGFRvIII-targeted therapies, and potentially monitor dynamic mutational changes during treatment.

Indexed as

MutationAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorBrain NeoplasmsCohort StudiesDiffusion Tensor ImagingErbB ReceptorsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGlioblastomaHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleBiomarkers, Tumorepidermal growth factor receptor VIIIErbB Receptors

Identifiers

PMID29617843
PMCPMC6280148
OpenAlexW2794728619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.